Matthew David Mellen is an active member of the California Bar and was admitted 1st December 2004. Matthew graduated from UCLA SOL.
Lawyer Information
| Name | Matthew David Mellen |
|---|---|
| First Admitted | 1 December 2004 (19 years, 4 months ago) |
| Status | Active |
| Bar Number | 233350 |
Contact
| Current Email | [email protected] |
|---|---|
| Previous Email | [email protected] |
| Phone Number | 510-263-9638 |
| Fax Number | 415-276-1902 |
Schools
| Law School | UCLA SOL (Los Angeles CA) |
|---|---|
| Undergraduate School | Harvard University (Cambridge MA) |
Address
| Current Address | Mellen Law Firm, 1545 Santa Clara Ave, Unit D Alameda, CA 94501-2185 |
|---|---|
| Map | |
| Previous Address | Mellen Law Firm 411 Borel Ave Ste 230 San Mateo, CA 94402 |
| Previous Address | Mellen Law Firm 1 Embarcadero Center Fl 5 San Francisco, CA 94111 |
| Previous Address | Mellen Law Firm, 1050 Marina Village Pkwy, Ste 102 Alameda, CA 94501-1033 |
History
| 30 April 2012 | Active (11 years, 12 months ago) |
|---|---|
| 29 February 2012 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (12 years, 1 month ago) Discipline w/actual suspension 11-C-13277 |
| 19 July 2011 | Active (12 years, 9 months ago) |
| 1 July 2011 | Not eligible to practice law in CA (12 years, 10 months ago) Suspended, failed to pay fees |
| 22 June 2011 | Conviction records transmitted to State Bar Court (12 years, 10 months ago) |
| 1 December 2004 | Admitted to the State Bar of California (19 years, 4 months ago) |
Discipline Summaries
February 29, 2012 MATTHEW DAVID MELLEN [#233350], 46, of San Mateo was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on one year of probation with a 60-day actual suspension and he was ordered to take the MPRE. If the actual suspension exceeds 90 days, he must comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court. The order took effect Feb. 29, 2012. After crashing his car into a median and leaving the scene with his then-wife, Mellen told a police officer he wasn’t wearing his glasses but admitted he’d been drinking. His blood alcohol content was .12 percent. He pleaded no contest to one count but chose to go to trial later, where he and his wife both testified that she had been driving. The jury convicted him of driving under the influence and DUI with a prior.He stipulated to the conviction and to acting with gross negligence by suggesting his wife was driving. |